[c-nsp] Discussion with 6500/7600 Sup Modules

[lists at hojmark.org]

> I personally would go with Layer 3 to the access so I can run
> OSPF rather then spanning tree.

There are pros and cons to doing that. Among other things, there
are failure scenarios, where OSPF is far, far slower than EIGRP
or L2. See www.cisco.com/go/srnd "HA Campus Recovery Analysis".

> Are you sure about all your numbers?  I thought the Sup32 was
> bigger then the 720.  

Not so. The Sup32 is 16G (bus) and the 720 is 360 (fabric).

> If I were overhauling our enterprise I would most likely put
> sup2's in the Access and 720's at my distribution / core. 
> Since I don't know much about the sup 32 I can't comment on
> them.

As I see it, Sup32 is meant to replace the Sup1s (16G) and
the Sup2s without fabric (also 16G). The Sup2s with fabric are
already replaced by the Sup720, which is cheaper, faster and
better.

A problem with Sup32 is that currently there's no Native IOS
and no routing.

-A